Vaccines: Where the freedom argument falls flat

Even before the Disneyland measles outbreak, just the mention of the word “vaccine” is practically a call to arms in some circles — and I don’t mean a call to roll up a sleeve for a shot. And unlike the culture wars, that generally elicit a similarly vocal response among our readers, the vaccine debate spans the political spectrum.

Last week we ran a piece by Austin writer and mom Stefani Caruso on why she rejects the idea that the state should mandate when and how many vaccines her child should get. Her argument is wrapped in the rhetoric of personal liberty.

I and the board are in the pro-vaccine camp. Medical science is clear. Unfortunately, our distance from the horrors of previous decades of rampant small pox, polio and measles have made some corners of society believe that an ounce of prevention is not worth of pound of cure. We are not solely responsible for ourselves and our families; we have responsibilities to our communities and that includes getting vaccinated for communicable diseases if medically possible.

But to Caruso’s point, where the personal liberty of anti-vaccine parents extend and the personal liberties of those placed at risk begin is a matter of some debate. Although if you rewind a few months to the U.S. Ebola hysteria and the demands that people showing no signs of infection stay home for weeks, the words “public health crisis” takes on a whole new meaning.

Some of the same politicians who demanded that the United States ban air travel from entire African countries in the name of public health are the same ones suggesting that parents be given carte blanche freedom to decide whether to immunize their children. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and other Congressional Republicans, railed against President Obama for not shutting down commercial flights to afflicted areas.

Cruz wrote in an October column for Trib Talk of “common sense” and that “prevention is the best strategy, and prudence dictates that we should ban commercial flights until this terrible outbreak is contained.” He even justified federal action as constitutional, he wrote: “The Constitution sets forth the federal government’s responsibility to “provide for the common defense.” ”

Don’t forget New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie that demanded that asymptomatic nurse Kaci Hickox be quarantined despite a mound a medical science that she was not contagious, contrary to all medical indications.

At least Sen. Rand Paul, noted for his fairly consistent libertarian views, acknowledged the disconnect between his personal views of freedom and mandatory quarantines.

One of my favorite reader responses (and we’ve received many) to Caruso’s column tackles the personal freedom issue head on and it comes from attorney John Kelsey, who lives in Dripping Spring.

FREEDOM NOT ENOUGH OF AN EXCUSE TO RESIST VACCINES

By John Kelsey

Stefani Caruso’s diatribe against the “politics and pharmaceutical profits” of mandatory vaccinations is based upon her own political beliefs, not reality, and certainly not medical science. Her repetition about her freedoms and rights has the same weight of authority as her bragging about being a seventh generation Texan. I know all about rights, I spent most of the last forty years as a criminal defense trial lawyer.

She is young and lucky enough to have been raised in a world without many diseases which plagued earlier generations. Because of that, she is clueless about the horrifying effects of polio and small pox. My late father, a doctor with an international reputation for research, suffered from polio as a child. It left him with one leg noticeably smaller than the other. He would have cringed at the current political fad of defiantly avoiding vaccines. He grew up in a world in which people routinely died or became permanently disabled by diseases that we no longer even hear of. That does not mean they no longer exist. The recent outbreak of measles in areas of California with high percentages of anti-vaxxers is proof of that.

Ms. Caruso flippantly recounts having the “mild illness” of chicken pox and watching “Pollyanna.” The irony is obviously lost upon her. She now has a 20 percent chance of suffering the really painful disease of shingles later in life. She ignores the harm chicken pox causes to pregnant women and the permanent damage it causes to unborn children. Many so-called mild childhood diseases have long term consequences, not only to the child but to the public. People actually die from measles; worldwide in 1990, over a half-million people died from measles. Science has given us the opportunity to have our world avoid the suffering of many natural causes. To repudiate that blessing because you “don’t like being told what to do” is not only childish, it is dangerous.

Her belief that parents have total control over the medical decisions affecting their children is simply dead wrong. Parents who have refused life-saving medical treatment for their children, like those who physically abuse their children, have routinely had the courts take protective custody; in cases where a child died, parents have been prosecuted and jailed for criminal homicide.

She recoils in horror at the concept of mandatory chemotherapy and asks will ADHD children require medication to attend school. What rock has she been living under? Doesn’t she read the news? Children, disruptive because of ADHD, or for any reason, are regularly removed from mainstream school classrooms.

Ms. Caruso’s political foot-stomping about her rights, the land of the free, civil liberties, etc. ignores one of the primary requirements for a “free” society to function; that is, personal responsibility — the responsibility of each person to refrain from harming others. Every society has limits upon “freedom.” Rules are necessary for the freedom of all and the dominance of none. There is an oft-repeated saying, that your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. That includes the right to go about in public without being needlessly infected by someone who didn’t like being told what to do.

Her assertion that 50 percent of older adults have minimal vaccine protection is actually an excellent reason to support mandatory vaccinations. Allowing your children to be the carriers of disease puts others at risk.

It is not all about you. There is no place in any society for those who think they are above the rules. If you feel that way, your recourse is to go somewhere where you don’t interact with other people; that is your freedom. But, you are still not free to ignore your children’s health or to abuse them. For that, society has another solution and it does not involve freedom.

View Comments
0

There are no comments yet. Be the first to post your thoughts. Sign in or register.